Is Syrian ‘Peace’ Conference Laying the Foundation for War?

The Geneva II conference which claims to be seeking to end the war in Syria
seems designed to fail and instead to provide an excuse for military intervention
by the United States and its allies. Human rights activist, Ajamu
Baraka, describes the negotiations as an "Orwellian subterfuge"
designed to provide justification for war and a lot of facts support his view.

The negotiations are destined to fail because of the way they have been set
up and the preconditions of the United States and its allies in the Syrian opposition
demanding that President Bashar al-Assad agree to leave government before negotiations
go forward.

The setup for failure begins with the limited participation. The rigged nature
of the negotiations was demonstrated when the UN
had to rescind an invitation to Iran to participate at the demand of the
United States and the Syrian opposition group. Iran is a close ally of Syria
and keeping them out of the negotiations is an effort to weaken and isolate
Syria. It is an indication of a desire by the United States for a preordained
conclusion rather than a fair negotiation between the parties.

Only one opposition group is included, the Syrian National Coalition, one
favored by the
United States but rejected
by 13 key rebel groups in Syria. There are scores of others involved in
the bloodshed in Syria, but these on-the-ground fighters are not included. How
can peace, even a partial peace like a cease-fire, be negotiated if those involved
in the fighting are not participating?

In fact, an agreement by the participants to stop fighting would entrap Assad.
Groups not included in the negotiations will continue to fight and Assad will
respond. When Assad responds to attacks, he will be accused of violating the
peace agreement. This will provide an excuse for outside military intervention.
The U.S. and its allies will claim: "Assad is violating the peace agreement;
there is no other choice than to enforce the agreement with military force."

The second and most important problem with the negotiations is the precondition
of the United States and the Syrian National Coalition that Assad must agree
to step down before negotiations can begin. The US and its allies falsely claim
that the removal of Assad has already been agreed to the "Geneva communiqué"
signed by Syria’s ally, Russia. As Shamus
Cooke points out, the
communiqué does indeed call for a negotiated political transition,
but nowhere does it state that such a transition must exclude Assad.

US Secretary of State John Kerry
kicked off the conference by demanding the removal of President Bashar al-Assad
from power. And, this has become the central issue in the discussions so far,
leading to a stalemate. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem, accused the
US and its Middle East allies, particularly Turkey and Saudi Arabia, of supporting
terrorist groups seeking to destabilize Syria and working to put forward their
own plans for a new government. The Syrians put forward their own plan that
would begin with ridding the nation of foreign terrorists. They argue it is
up to the Syrian people to decide who their leaders are and what type of government
they want.

The kickoff of the conference coincided with a propaganda campaign. A report
funded by Qatar claimed the Assad government had tortured and killed 11,000
prisoners. There has been a history of torture in Syria; in fact, the United
States sent people to be tortured in Syria as part of its rendition
program, so on its face the claim does not seem far-fetched. But did they
prove the case?

Reporter
Dan Murphy of the Christian Science Monitor points out some of the problems
with the report. He writes it is "a single source report, from an unidentified
man, who is related by marriage to a similarly unidentified member of the ‘Syrian
National Movement.’" The Syrian National Movement is an opposition group
funded by Qatar that has been trying to remove Assad since 2011. Further, the
report was rushed to publication; the source was "interviewed on Jan. 12,
13 and 18 of this year. The report was provided to reporters yesterday, Jan.
20." This resulted in no thorough examination of the photographs. Further,
Murphy reports the document actually indicates 835 individual cases were examined,
not all of them were shown to have been killed or tortured, and the 11,000 figure
that made headlines was an extrapolation.

Yet, this has been trumpeted in the media as fact. A Washington
Post editorial published on January 22 treated the 11,000 killed and tortured
by Assad without any doubt. They quote Secretary Kerry saying the report shows
Syria conducting "systematic
torture and execution of thousands of prisoners."
The editorial revealed how the peace process could lead to war: "Mr. Obama
probably could force the measures Mr. Brahimi is seeking [i.e. Assad resigning]
by presenting Mr. Assad with the choice of accepting them or enduring US airstrikes."
It is notable that the Post is putting military strikes on the agenda now –
even before the negotiations fail or a peace agreement is violated.

The US media had been pushing for war with Syria during the last run-up to
war when Obama decided to send the decision to Congress. Thanks to opposition
across the political spectrum in Congress and among the American people, the
war was prevented. Russia’s intervention which put forward a compromise that
ridded the Syrian government of chemical weapons provided a face-saving escape
for the Obama administration.

Since then the claims that Sarin gas was used by the Syrian government from
Syrian-held territory have been put into doubt. The New York Times, Human Rights
Watch and others who favored a US attack had claimed the rockets came from Syrian
territory based on a vector analysis of the angle of the rockets. But, this
fell apart when experts concluded the rockets did not have the range to reach
the targets. The
NY Times was forced to quietly distance itself from a front page story making
these claims.

We are already seeing a media drum beat for war gearing up. The media is consistent
in repeating
several lies about the Syrian negotiations, and constantly blaming Assad
for refusing to abide by nonexistent requirements of the Geneva communiqué.
We can expect the hawkish US media to escalate the drumbeat and put forward
war propaganda as the failure of the peace negotiations continues.

And Reuters
reports that weapons aid to Syria has been "secretly" approved
by Congress. Weapons approved include antitank weapons and small arms. Reuters
writes "The weapons deliveries have been funded by the US Congress, in
votes behind closed doors, through the end of government fiscal year 2014, which
ends on September 30. . ." How does the Congress have secret votes to approve
war-making actions? According to Reuters "Congress approved funding for
weapons deliveries to the Syrian rebels in classified sections of defense appropriations
legislation, two sources familiar with the matter said."

So, on one hand the US claims to be seeking peace and with the other it is
fueling war with weapons. In public, the Congress opposed war with Syria, but
in secret votes it provides funding for weapons for the Syrian war.

Americans who oppose war better get prepared now. There has been a long-term
agenda to remove the Assad family from power in Syria and the US foreign policy
establishment has not given up on that goal, nor have US allies Israel and Saudi
Arabia. This seems to be one more time when peace negotiations are a likely
prelude to war unless the people of the United States see through these actions
and prevent it.

This article was originally published on Truthout.
We discussed these matters in detail with Ajamu Baraka and Alli McCracken
of CODEPINK on our radio show, Clearing The FOG, this week. You
can listen here.